From: "Gary Jeffers" <CCGARY@MIZZOU1.missouri.edu>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 94 17:50:14 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: e$ barter & sub(parasites)
Message-ID: <9408090050.AA02275@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   My congraulations to Hal for his contribution to the e$... thread
with his barter text. My congradulations to Peace for his contributions
to the e$ thread with his barter & parasite text.




Hal says: ----------------------------------------------------------

>The second problem is the regulation of "scrip" and barter systems.  Ths
>was pointed out on the list last year by someone who had actually been
>involved in a private barter or scrip system which was shut down by the
>government, at great cost to all concerned.  These regulations can be
>found at 26 CFR 1.6045-1.  From subsection (f)(5)(ii), "Scrip is a toke
>issued by the barter exchange that is transferable from one member or
>client, of the barter exchange to another member or client, or to the
>barter exchange, in payment for property or services".  I think this on
>will eventually get the "NetBank" people in trouble.  (You call a 900
>number and in exchange for a charge on your phone bill they give you a
>digital token you can exchange for property or services by participatin
>merchants.)  Barter exchanges are required to get the names and SS numbrs
>of all participants and report their transactions to the IRS.  This woud
>be inconsistent with the privacy we seek from ecash.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


Peace says:*******************************************************

>I can recall that many years back the casinos in Las Vegas all
>accepted the chips from the other ones and then had a great
>exchange each day where the accounts were settled up.  Even the
>gift shops took chips in place of cash.  The US Treasury put a stop
>to this as it was considered to be a replacement for cash.

>Also I hear a lot about bearer bonds, but never in the US.  OTOH
>the NYC subways have started a cash card that they expect merchants
>to accept in lieu of coins.  It would be nice to know what the Feds
>will or won't accept.  BTW, does it matter if the e$ are US denominated
>Could e$ be presented as travelers checks?  The possibilities here are
>extremely interesting.

- - -

>Bob said>> However, it's a stupid parasite which
>>kills it's host, and that's what I'm counting on here.

>Not really true.  All parasites kill their host or they would not
>be considered parasites (ie. live at the EXPENSE of the host).  The
>only question is how quickly the host dies.  There is an entire
>epidemiology of parasitism, ie. which strategies are best for the
>parasite.  The virulent ones must be able to find a new host quickly,
>the ones that can't exit quickly rely on the host living for a long tim.
>There was a good article in SciAm on this a little while back.

>Also remember, it is the US Supreme Court which ruled that the
>power to tax is the power to destroy.  Sounds like as good a
>definition of parasitism as any.
*******************************************************************

   They have demonstrated that the Fed state will not tolerate an alt-
ternate cash system & repeatedly kill them. This is because they know
that an alternate cash system could be easily fashioned to kill them.
- as though there was any benefit to keeping the giant Federal parasite
alive.
   They have also demonstrated that the only in-US alternate cash system
that will survive is an alternate cash system that will florish without
the Feds permission. This implies anonymous e$ with encryption & remail-
ers. Chaum's e$ with an offshore clearinghouse comes to mind.
   I thought Peace'es more accurate description of a parasite & his
characterization of the Fed State as a parasite were particularly NICE:-
:-)  : -) :-)   :-)

   There are other evils of this monocash system. 1. It allows elite in-
siders to profit from secret Federal Reserve moves. 2 It allows a privat
organization (the Federal Reserve) to manipulate the US'es money system.
3. It is an anti-freedom monopoly of cash. 4. It kills experiments with
superior cash systems that would proliferate otherwise. & 5.It supresses
script driven barter systems that circumvent the frequent low volocity
problems with other instruments that is in conventional systems.-Some-
times most people hold their cash & wait for a buyer (with cash) before
they spend. That way everybody is waiting for someone to buy from them
before they buy. With script driven barter systems, you make script
by providing something. To restate this more clearly, in barter systems
business activity is encouraged. - The increased volocity of "cash"
is encouraged. Deals are more fluidly made & business (tranactions) are
encouraged.

                                       PUSH EM BACK! PUSH EM BACK!
                                       WWWAAAYYY  BBBAAACCCK!
                                       BBBEEEAAATTTT  STATE!